Challenging Trips-Plus Agreements: The Potential Utility of Non-Violation Disputes
AbstractA World Trade Organization (WTO) non-violation complaint is one where an agreement has not been breached, but the complainant alleges an expected benefit under the agreement has been abrogated. When the TRIPS Agreement came into force non-violation complaints were not available for TRIPS disputes. This position was to be reviewed. Non-violation complaints remain unavailable for TRIPS disputes. In the early days of TRIPS the exclusion of non-violation disputes seemed rational because of the unique nature of TRIPS, among WTO agreements. The TRIPS Agreement requires members to implement minimum standards of intellectual property protection in their national laws. Members therefore have to provide at least that level of protection. If they do not do so a violation complaint could be initiated. Consequently, it was not logical to look for any notion of expected benefit beyond the wording of the minimum standards. However, TRIPS permits members to have greater standards and many members have agreed to higher standards through free trade agreements. These TRIPS-plus standards have arguably undermined expected benefits that should flow from TRIPS, especially for users of intellectual property rights. This article discusses the utility of making non-violation disputes available for TRIPS disputes from the perspectives of both the users and owners of intellectual property rights. This analysis includes a discussion of whether TRIPS-plus free trade agreements undermine expected benefits of the TRIPS Agreement and should thus be the subject of a non-violation dispute. Oxford University Press 2009, all rights reserved, Oxford University Press.
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
Bibliographic InfoArticle provided by Oxford University Press in its journal Journal of International Economic Law.
Volume (Year): 12 (2009)
Issue (Month): 4 (December)
Contact details of provider:
Postal: Oxford University Press, Great Clarendon Street, Oxford OX2 6DP, UK
Fax: 01865 267 985
Web page: http://www.jiel.oupjournals.org/
You can help add them by filling out this form.
reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.Access and download statisticsgeneral information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Oxford University Press) or (Christopher F. Baum).
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.